Jeremy Corbyn Vol. 2

[Gogoplata]

sidicks said:

Does he genuinely not understand what government bonds are, or is he simply hoping that his supporters don't?

I highly doubt that the majority of Corbynistas understand what they are, or even care what they are, going by the people I know who support Corbyn.

[Vaud]

Gogoplata said:

sidicks said:

Does he genuinely not understand what government bonds are, or is he simply hoping that his supporters don't?

I highly doubt that the majority of Corbynistas understand what they are, or even care what they are, going by the people I know who support Corbyn.

I doubt the majority of the British public know what they are and their function (and implications)

[Lance Catamaran]

Vaud said:

Gogoplata said:

sidicks said:

Does he genuinely not understand what government bonds are, or is he simply hoping that his supporters don't?

I highly doubt that the majority of Corbynistas understand what they are, or even care what they are, going by the people I know who support Corbyn.

I doubt the majority of the British public know what they are and their function (and implications)

I honestly don't, can someone give me a thicko-level explanation?

[sidicks]

Lance Catamaran said:

I honestly don't, can someone give me a thicko-level explanation?

Governments borrow by issue Gilts (bonds) to investors (such as banks, insurance companies, pension funds and private individuals),

[Lance Catamaran]

sidicks said:

Lance Catamaran said:

I honestly don't, can someone give me a thicko-level explanation?

Governments borrow by issue Gilts (bonds) to investors (such as banks, insurance companies, pension funds and private individuals),

Thanks. So basically they're talking about issuing bonds because it sounds more PR-friendly than borrowing money?

[sidicks]

Lance Catamaran said:

Thanks. So basically they're talking about issuing bonds because it sounds more PR-friendly than borrowing money?

More than that, they're claiming they don't have to borrow because they can issue bonds instead! That's deliberately misleading the public and is the second time this has happened.

[oop north]

sidicks said:

Governments borrow by issue Gilts (bonds) to investors (such as banks, insurance companies, pension funds and private individuals),

The claim by corbynistas seems to be that borrowing to nationalise industries does not add to debt (or the deficit) because you are adding an asset as well as a liability and they cancel each other out. I suspect that if labour won we would see them attempt to nationalise a lot more than they have talked about under the excuse that interest is currently so low it's worth borrowing lots to 'invest' in lots (as stated openly in the manifesto / funding doc)

In theory if they were able to run the industries profitably then the profits should cover the borrowing interest. In theory.

Interesting that the IFS have said (iirc) that they are likely only to get half the £6.8bn they say they can raise from tackling tax avoidance and evasion

[anonymous-user]

sidicks said:

Governments borrow by issue Gilts (bonds) to investors (such as banks, insurance companies, pension funds and private individuals),

Aren't they just being a bit ham fisted when it comes to explaining the difference about borrowing for spending rather borrowing to buy an asset?

borrowing a quid to buy a quid's worth of positive balance sheet is just a paper exercise surely?

[sidicks]

desolate said:

Aren't they just being a bit ham fisted when it comes to explaining the difference about borrowing for spending rather borrowing to buy an asset?

borrowing a quid to buy a quid's worth of positive balance sheet is just a paper exercise surely?

They are simply pretending they aren't borrowing - at no point have they explained that in this process they would be borrowing but adding an asset of a similar value (or expected value if they can run it competently...)

[johnxjsc1985]

Scrapping Trident, Knighthood for Gerry Adams and apologising to anyone who we might have offended and now feels the need to commit horrendous acts upon our Citizens.
If he ever get near Number 10 Downing St God only knows what he has in store for us.

[s2art]

sidicks said:

desolate said:

Aren't they just being a bit ham fisted when it comes to explaining the difference about borrowing for spending rather borrowing to buy an asset?

borrowing a quid to buy a quid's worth of positive balance sheet is just a paper exercise surely?

They are simply pretending they aren't borrowing - at no point have they explained that in this process they would be borrowing but adding an asset of a similar value.

The value of a business depends on how profitable it is. If (say) they bought the water companies and (somehow) kept profit levels at a similar level then maybe. But they say consumers are being ripped off and intend to reduce profit levels by cutting customer bills. Thus they would devalue the companies and will have paid over the odds.

[anonymous-user]

s2art said:

The value of a business depends on how profitable it is.

No it really isn't.

That is a sentence in its own right so I thought it was reasonable to isolate it.

[sidicks]

s2art said:

The value of a business depends on how profitable it is. If (say) they bought the water companies and (somehow) kept profit levels at a similar level then maybe. But they say consumers are being ripped off and intend to reduce profit levels by cutting customer bills. Thus they would devalue the companies and will have paid over the odds.

How profitable it is expected to be in the future, certainly!

[sidicks]

desolate said:

No it really isn't.

That is a sentence in its own right so I thought it was reasonable to isolate it.

I'm sure you understand the point being made.

[anonymous-user]

johnxjsc1985 said:

If he ever get near Number 10 Downing St God only knows what he has in store for us.

He is pretty near to No. 10 now - and I bet he is stting himself as much as you are.

[mybrainhurts]

desolate said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

If he ever get near Number 10 Downing St God only knows what he has in store for us.

He is pretty near to No. 10 now - and I bet he is stting himself as much as you are.

Nah, Comrade Corbynochev has balls of steel. Diane said so.

[Cold]

mybrainhurts said:

Nah, Comrade Corbynochev has balls of steel. Diane said so.

I wonder if she counted them.

[Stickyfinger]

desolate said:

He is pretty near to No. 10 now - and I bet he is stting himself as much as you are.

I do not think so....not by a country mile......

[Burwood]

Smollet said:

alfie2244 said:

Cobnapint said:

Always thought Corbyn was a complete idiot.

Just watched the Andrew Neil interview with him tonight.

Oh. My. fking. God.

I recorded it....do I need to move all throwable objects or do i just delete it?

If you believe in magic then he's very convincing.

Do we need a David Blaine thread

[768]

And then I'll say that I never met you.